DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 02/23/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-9, 20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Salmela discloses a method for processing a sound program by a playback system, the method comprising: a. receiving the sound program (Salmela; Para [0012]; Fig 2; dolby decoder receives sound program 162); b. extracting a center channel from the sound program (Salmela; Para [0012] Fig 2; dolby decoder extracts center channel C); c. applying a dynamic range compression (Salmela; Para [0012] Fig 2; dynamic compression 180) and applying a boost to the virtual center channel, to produce a compressed virtual center channel (Salmela; Para [0012]; boost of compressed center channel); and d. producing a speaker driver signal using the compressed virtual center channel (Salmela; Para [0021]; Fig 2; center speaker to receive compressed center channel from center channel processing); but do not expressly disclose and no other channels of the sound program; extracting a virtual center channel; wherein i) applying the boost to the virtual center channel comprises applying a first boost when a system volume is less than a first volume threshold and a second boost when the system volume is more than the first volume threshold, the first boost being greater than the second boost, and ii) applying the dynamic range compression to the virtual center channel comprises applying a first compression when the system volume is less than a second volume threshold and a second compression when the system volume is more than the second volume threshold, the first compression being different than the second compression. However, in the same field of endeavor, Oh et al disclose a method and no other channels of the sound program (Oh et al; Para [0014]); extracting a virtual center channel (Oh et al; Para [0006]; generate virtual center channel); wherein i) applying the boost to the virtual center channel comprises applying and ii) applying the dynamic range compression to the virtual center channel comprises applying a first compression when the system volume is less than a second volume threshold (Oh et al; Para [0050]-[0054]) and a second compression when the system volume is more than the second volume threshold (Oh et al; Para [0050]-[0054]), the first compression being different than the second compression (Oh et al; Para [0050]-[0054]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the compression taught by Oh as compression taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been reducing a dynamic range corresponding to a signal level is available (Oh et al; Para [0004]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Wang et al disclose a method comprising wherein i) applying the boost to the virtual center channel comprises applying a first boost when a system volume is less than a first volume threshold (Wang et al; Fig 3; Para [0057]) and a second boost when the system volume is more than the first volume threshold (Wang et al; Fig 3; Para [0057]), the first boost being greater than the second boost (Wang et al; Fig 3; Para [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the boost taught by Wang as boost taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide consistent volume with sonic balance and no audible side effects (Wang et al; Para [0007]).
Regarding claim 3, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein i) and ii) are performed in response to a same instance of the system volume. However, in the same field of endeavor, Wang et al disclose a method wherein i) and ii) are performed in response to a same instance of the system volume (Wang et al; Fig 3; Para [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the compression taught by Wang as boost taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide consistent volume with sonic balance and no audible side effects (Wang et al; Para [0007]).
Regarding claim 6, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the sound program is in a stereo format having a left channel and a right channel, and extracting the virtual center channel comprises up mixing the left channel and the right channel to produce the virtual center channel. However, in the same field of endeavor, Oh et al disclose a method wherein the sound program is in a stereo format having a left channel and a right channel, and extracting the virtual center channel comprises up mixing the left channel and the right channel to produce the virtual center channel (Oh et al; Para [0006]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the center channel taught by Oh as center channel taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been reducing a dynamic range corresponding to a signal level is available (Oh et al; Para [0004]).
Regarding claim 7, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 6, but do not expressly disclose wherein the up mixing comprises converting the left channel and the right channel into a multi-channel format. However, in the same field of endeavor, Oh et al disclose a method wherein the up mixing comprises converting the left channel and the right channel into a multi-channel format (Oh et al; Para [0006]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the center channel taught by Oh as center channel taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been reducing a dynamic range corresponding to a signal level is available (Oh et al; Para [0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1 wherein the sound program is in a multi-channel surround format that has a center channel, and extracting the virtual center channel comprises taking the center channel to be the virtual center channel (Salmela; Para [0012]; extract center channel as virtual center channel).
Regarding claim 9, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1 wherein i) applying the dynamic range compression is only in a frequency band above 800 Hz or ii) applying the boost is only in the frequency band above 800 Hz (Salmela; Para [0012]).
Regarding claim 20, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1 wherein a-d are performed by a processor in a control device being one of: a streaming media console, a tablet computer, or a laptop computer (Salmela; Para [0013]).
Regarding claim 22, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1 wherein a-d are performed by a processor in a smart television (Salmela; Para [0013]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further in view of Sun et al (US 2015/0254054 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al and further in view of Gundry et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly wherein when the system volume is greater than a set threshold the second boost is zero dB. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sun et al disclose a method wherein when the system volume is greater than a set threshold the second boost is zero dB (Sun et al; Para [0094]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the boost taught by Sun as boost taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the user experience (Sun et al; Para [0027]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Scheirer et al (US 2015/0237454 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose further comprising: determining whether the sound program is tagged as being a soundtrack of a movie, wherein the speaker driver signal is produced using the compressed virtual center channel if or in response to determining that the sound program is tagged as being a soundtrack of movie. However, in the same field of endeavor, Scheirer et al disclose a method further comprising: determining whether the sound program is tagged as being a soundtrack of a movie (Scheirer et al; Para [0029]), wherein the speaker driver signal is produced using the compressed virtual center channel if or in response to determining that the sound program is tagged as being a soundtrack of movie (Scheirer et al; Para [0030]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the boost taught by Scheirer as boost taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the accuracy of the audio processing (Scheirer et al; Para [0027]).
Claim(s) 10-11, 18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Jarvis et al (US 2020/0351602 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein a-d are performed by a processor in a smart speaker. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jarvis et al disclose a method wherein a-d are performed by a processor in a smart speaker (Jarvis et al; Para [0027][0055][0091]-[0092]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the speaker taught by Jarvis as speaker in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more flexible and dynamic platform through which sound reproduction can be offered to the end-user (Jarvis et al; Para [0048]).
Regarding claim 11, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al and further in view of Jarvis et al disclose the method of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose further comprising in the smart speaker: receiving an enhanced dialogue indication via a wireless communication network from a digital media player that is executing in a control device, wherein the smart speaker and the control device are in different nodes of the wireless communication network and b-d are performed only when receiving the enhanced dialogue indication. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jarvis et al disclose a method further comprising in the smart speaker: receiving an enhanced dialogue indication via a wireless communication network from a digital media player that is executing in a control device (Jarvis et al; Para [0027][0055][0091]-[0092]; playback device 702 receive dialog enhancement from UI 708 interpreted as control device), wherein the smart speaker and the control device are in different nodes of the wireless communication network and b-d are performed only when receiving the enhanced dialogue indication (Jarvis et al; Para [0027][0055][0091]-[0092]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the speaker taught by Jarvis as speaker in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more flexible and dynamic platform through which sound reproduction can be offered to the end-user (Jarvis et al; Para [0048]).
Regarding claim 18, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a current time of day falls within a predetermined schedule. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jarvis et al disclose a method wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a current time of day falls within a predetermined schedule (Jarvis et al; Para [0091]-[0093]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the speaker taught by Jarvis as speaker in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more flexible and dynamic platform through which sound reproduction can be offered to the end-user (Jarvis et al; Para [0048]).
Regarding claim 21, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 20, but do not expressly disclose further comprising sending the speaker driver signal to drive a speaker of a pair of headphones. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jarvis et al disclose a method further comprising sending the speaker driver signal to drive a speaker of a pair of headphones (Jarvis et al; Para [0033-0034]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the speaker taught by Jarvis as speaker in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more flexible and dynamic platform through which sound reproduction can be offered to the end-user (Jarvis et al; Para [0048]).
Claim(s) 12, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Jarvis et al (US 2020/0351602 A1) and further in view of Triplett et al (US 2020/0128325 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al and further in view of Jarvis et al disclose the method of claim 11, but do not expressly disclose wherein the digital media player is being executed by a processor of the control device and is sending the enhanced dialogue indication or a movie mode indication to the smart speaker. However, in the same field of endeavor, Triplett et al et al disclose a method wherein the digital media player is being executed by a processor of the control device and is sending the enhanced dialogue indication or a movie mode indication to the smart speaker (Triplett et al; Para [0087]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the movie indicator taught by Triplett as movie indicator in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to increase the accessibility of audio content (Triplett et al; Para [0003]).
Regarding claim 19, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an indication that the playback system is in a movie mode of operation, and the sound program is not a system sound. However, in the same field of endeavor, Triplett et al et al disclose a method wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an indication that the playback system is in a movie mode of operation (Triplett et al; Para [0087]), and the sound program is not a system sound (Triplett et al; Para [0087]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the movie indicator taught by Triplett as movie indicator in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to increase the accessibility of audio content (Triplett et al; Para [0003]).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Jarvis et al (US 2020/0351602 A1) and further in view of Triplett et al (US 2020/0128325 A1) and further in view of Millington et al (US 2019/0121604 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al and further in view of Jarvis et al disclose the method of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose comprising in the smart speaker: receiving a movie mode indication via a wireless communication network from a digital media player that is executed in a control device where the smart speaker and the control device are in different nodes of the wireless communication network, wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving the movie mode indication and the sound program is not a system sound. However, in the same field of endeavor, Triplett et al et al disclose a method comprising in the smart speaker: receiving a movie mode indication via a wireless communication network from a digital media player that is executed in a control device (Triplett et al; Para [0087]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the movie indicator taught by Triplett as movie indicator in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to increase the accessibility of audio content (Triplett et al; Para [0003]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Millington et al et al disclose a method wherein where the smart speaker and the control device are in different nodes of the wireless communication network (Millington et al; Para [0123]-[0126]), wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving the movie mode indication and the sound program is not a system sound (Millington et al; Para [0126]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the movie indicator taught by Millington as movie indicator in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more flexible and dynamic platform (Millington et al; Para [0039]).
Regarding claim 14, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al and further in view of Jarvis et al and further in view of Triplett et al and further in view of Millington et al disclose the method of claim 13, but do not expressly disclose wherein the digital media player is executed by a processor of the control device and is sending the movie mode indication to the smart speaker. However, in the same field of endeavor, Triplett et al et al disclose a method wherein the digital media player is executed by a processor of the control device and is sending the movie mode indication to the smart speaker (Triplett et al; Para [0087]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the movie indicator taught by Triplett as movie indicator in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to increase the accessibility of audio content (Triplett et al; Para [0003]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further in view of Starobin et al (WO 2019/133942 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a vocalized question by a user or listener of the playback system, during playback of the sound program. However, in the same field of endeavor, Starobin et al et al disclose a method wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a vocalized question by a user or listener of the playback system, during playback of the sound program (Starobin; Para [041]; [058]-[060]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound enhancer taught by Starobin as sound enhancer in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the user experience.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Darcy et al (WO 2021/202956 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting acoustic noise in an ambient environment of the playback system exceeds a threshold. However, in the same field of endeavor, Darcy et al et al disclose a method wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting acoustic noise in an ambient environment of the playback system exceeds a threshold (Darcy et al; Para [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound enhancer taught by Darcy as sound enhancer in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to allow the listener to hear it more succinctly (Darcy et al; Para [0022]).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salmela (US 2016/0307581 A1) in view of Oh et al (US 2008/0165975 A1) and further in view of Wang et al (US 2021/0233548 A1) and further ion view of Amazon Staff (NPL, Prime Video debuts Dialogue boost for an easier experience)
Regarding claim 17, Salmela in view of Oh et al and further in view of Wang et al disclose the method of claim 1 wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a user or listener of the playback system has enabled subtitles, during playback of the sound program. However, in the same field of endeavor, Amazon disclose a method wherein b-d are performed in response to receiving an enhanced dialogue indication, the enhanced dialogue indication having been sent in response to detecting a user or listener of the playback system has enabled subtitles, during playback of the sound program (Amazon; Page 4; lines 4-10). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound enhancer taught by Amazon as sound enhancer in the method taught by Salmela. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the user experience.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUASSI A GANMAVO whose telephone number is (571)270-5761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 5712707136. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KUASSI A GANMAVO/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights